Jump to content

Long-Term Closures - Providing Service Around Service Outages


Lance

Recommended Posts

This is an off-shoot of the proposals thread. In an effort to not have this buried in a sea of new-build proposals, I've separated this out into a new thread.

 

In a recent article from AMNY, transit experts and members of the MTA board are recommending that, to get the subway in better shape, the agency should consider more temporary full-time line closures as opposed to the current setup of weekend/late night service changes. That has me wondering, how would the services be managed under a weeks- or months-long closure of portions of the subway. If for instance, the 6th Avenue line from Columbus Circle/5 Avenue to Jay St/DeKalb Av, what services would run and how would they? 

 

I'll start off using my example above since this line has become a major issue as of late.

 

Our main choke points under this scenario are along the 8th Avenue line from Chambers St to Jay St. The World Trade Center station already turns 15 (E) trains at the height of the rush hour. It would be a challenge for additional service to terminate there, but it would be equally difficult to send more service through Cranberry. That means there will be significant reductions in service to fit the primary services, which in this case are the (A)(D)(E) and (F) lines.

 

We do know that the (B) and (M) can be removed from 6th Avenue without too much of a hassle. Both lines are extras in Manhattan with the former as an extra for its entire route. I propose that the (B) is completely suspended for the duration of this project. Brighton express service would either be served in one of two ways: additional (Q) trains designated as <Q> in a throwback to the '01 Manhattan Bridge work or, to pull a Wallyhorse, convert the current (W) into the old QT line, running from Ditmars Blvd to Coney Island via Whitehall St and as a local along the Brighton line while the present (Q) is cut back to Brighton Beach and would run express during normal hours. In regards to the (M), that line would be rerouted back to Nassau St, running down to Coney Island along the West End line to replace (D) service.

 

The problem that remains is how to route the primaries mentioned above. I fear that in any proposal, the (C) would have to be suspended as the (F) would have to run through Cranberry to get to/from Jay St and the Culver line. To prevent the return of the full-time (A) local that we've seen for many years when weekend work affected 8th Avenue and/or Fulton St, I'd recommend that the (D) trains run to Euclid Av during the days and to the World Trade Center late nights. As I type this, I realize it might make more sense to suspend the (D) and reroute (C) service to 205 Street as a full-time Concourse local considering the reroutes involved. As this would make for a tight squeeze in the Cranberry tubes, some (F) trains would run via the Crosstown line, labelled as (G) trains to minimize confusion.

 

(G) trains running on Queens Blvd would be less confusing in this scenario as service would be extended from Court Square to 71 Avenue to compensate for the loss of (M) service. Finally, to maintain some service along the 63rd Street line, a shuttle would run from 21 St-Queensbridge to Lexington Av-63 St to connect with the (Q) trains.

 

There are no winners in this proposal, but there plenty of losers. Our biggest losers would be riders along Central Park West. Under this proposal, service along that line would be cut in half. In a close second, Queens Blvd local riders, who also have their Manhattan-Queens service halved. 

 

I'd like to see how you'd reroute trains around any line closure of your choice. I realize this is more of a thought exercise than anything else, but I would greatly appreciate it if you kept the ludicrously outrageous ideas to a minimum. Also, be prepared for any criticism. I do not consider myself above the fray and neither should you. I look forward to your responses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I wonder if for a 6th Avenue closure you could do something similar to the February GO but full time. (D) via 8th Avenue/Culver and (F) via Broadway/West End with the (brownM) to Chambers Street? 

 

Anyway, if I was doing a 4th Avenue closure: (No trains between Atlantic-Barclays and 8 Av/62 St/95 St)

(D) Norwood-205 St to Brighton Beach via Brighton Express; (B) suspended

(N) Astoria-Ditmars to Atlantic-Barclays via tunnel; (W) suspended

<N> 8th Avenue to Coney Island

(R) Forest Hills-71 Av to Whitehall Street

:75px-NYCS-bull-trans-S6_svg: 62 St to Coney Island 

 

Shuttle buses: (four routes)

-95 St to Atlantic-Barclays via local (signed as R)

-8 Av, 59 St, 36 St, Atlantic (signed as N)

-62 St, all (D) stops to 36 St then Atlantic (signed as D)

-Crosstown shuttle bus connecting 59 St, 8 Av <N>, 62 St  <N>  :75px-NYCS-bull-trans-S6_svg:, Av N  (F), and Kings Highway  (D)  (Q) .

 

New ferry landings in Bensonhurst and Coney Island served by the South Brooklyn Route and expanded  :bus_bullet_x27:  :bus_bullet_x28:  :bus_bullet_x37:  :bus_bullet_x38: service.

 

(West End and Sea Beach would be done in separate phases)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if for a 6th Avenue closure you could do something similar to the February GO but full time. (D) via 8th Avenue/Culver and (F) via Broadway/West End with the (brownM) to Chambers Street? 

 

Anyway, if I was doing a 4th Avenue closure: (No trains between Atlantic-Barclays and 8 Av/62 St/95 St)

(D) Norwood-205 St to Brighton Beach via Brighton Express; (B) suspended

(N) Astoria-Ditmars to Atlantic-Barclays via tunnel; (W) suspended

<N> 8th Avenue to Coney Island

(R) Forest Hills-71 Av to Whitehall Street

:75px-NYCS-bull-trans-S6_svg: 62 St to Coney Island 

 

Shuttle buses: (four routes)

-95 St to Atlantic-Barclays via local (signed as R)

-8 Av, 59 St, 36 St, Atlantic (signed as N)

-62 St, all (D) stops to 36 St then Atlantic (signed as D)

-Crosstown shuttle bus connecting 59 St, 8 Av <N>, 62 St  <N>  :75px-NYCS-bull-trans-S6_svg:, Av N  (F), and Kings Highway  (D)  (Q) .

 

New ferry landings in Bensonhurst and Coney Island served by the South Brooklyn Route and expanded  :bus_bullet_x27:  :bus_bullet_x28:  :bus_bullet_x37:  :bus_bullet_x38: service.

 

(West End and Sea Beach would be done in separate phases)

for your plan for the 6 Av Clousure, (C)(B) and (W) will have to be suspended to fit all the trains. What need to be looked at is IND style service pattern, where local only runs in one borough while the Express runs to Manhattan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think full closures are necessary. If union work rules are reformed, and more fastrack type things are done (overnight/weekend closures), things could get done much faster. I also think the infrastructural toll other lines would suffer as a result of a full closure on one should be considered. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For lines with express and local tracks (like the 4ave line), is it necessary to bring them into full closures?

You could do express/local only services where the local or express tracks are closed for upgrades 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think for projects line multiple local Station closures I would run Shuttle Buses in a certain section at least weekdays. Like for the Bay Ridge, 53rd, Prospect closures Shuttle Buses between 86 St and Atlantic Av stopping at Bay Ridge Av, 59 St, 53 St, 36 St, Prospect Av, 9 St

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for your plan for the 6 Av Clousure, (C)(B) and (W) will have to be suspended to fit all the trains. What need to be looked at is IND style service pattern, where local only runs in one borough while the Express runs to Manhattan

I was thinking the same thing.

 

If it's the 8th Av Line below 59th, for example:

 

(A) via (D) to West 4th, then via (F) to MetroTech

(C) local via Fulton Street, terminating at either MetroTech or at Court Street/Transit Museum on the west and either Euclid or Rockaway/116 on the east

(B) is CPW local to 168 St; terminates at Columbus Circle but either goes to Penn to reverse or holds to let (A)(D) pass through the switches below 72nd

 

(E) follows the (M) / (V) from 5 Av and terminates at 2 Av or replaces/supplements (R) to either Canal St or Whitehall

 

(M) goes to Chambers Street; (W) extended to 86th St on the Sea Beach; (R) is truncated to Whitehall full-time and (G) becomes QBL local full-time if (E) goes to 2 Av; if not, (W) is suspended and (N) service increased with 1/4 trains to 96th St.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quiet or he'll here you. 

:lol:  :lol:

 

This is an off-shoot of the proposals thread. In an effort to not have this buried in a sea of new-build proposals, I've separated this out into a new thread.

 

In a recent article from AMNY, transit experts and members of the MTA board are recommending that, to get the subway in better shape, the agency should consider more temporary full-time line closures as opposed to the current setup of weekend/late night service changes. That has me wondering, how would the services be managed under a weeks- or months-long closure of portions of the subway. If for instance, the 6th Avenue line from Columbus Circle/5 Avenue to Jay St/DeKalb Av, what services would run and how would they? 

 

I'll start off using my example above since this line has become a major issue as of late.

 

Our main choke points under this scenario are along the 8th Avenue line from Chambers St to Jay St. The World Trade Center station already turns 15 E trains at the height of the rush hour. It would be a challenge for additional service to terminate there, but it would be equally difficult to send more service through Cranberry. That means there will be significant reductions in service to fit the primary services, which in this case are the A/D/E and F lines.

 

We do know that the B and M can be removed from 6th Avenue without too much of a hassle. Both lines are extras in Manhattan with the former as an extra for its entire route. I propose that the B is completely suspended for the duration of this project. Brighton express service would either be served in one of two ways: additional Q trains designated as < Q > in a throwback to the '01 Manhattan Bridge work or, to pull a Wallyhorse, convert the current W into the old QT line, running from Ditmars Blvd to Coney Island via Whitehall St and as a local along the Brighton line while the present Q is cut back to Brighton Beach and would run express during normal hours. In regards to the M, that line would be rerouted back to Nassau St, running down to Coney Island along the West End line to replace D service.

 

The problem that remains is how to route the primaries mentioned above. I fear that in any proposal, the C would have to be suspended as the F would have to run through Cranberry to get to/from Jay St and the Culver line. To prevent the return of the full-time A local that we've seen for many years when weekend work affected 8th Avenue and/or Fulton St, I'd recommend that the D trains run to Euclid Av during the days and to the World Trade Center late nights. As I type this, I realize it might make more sense to suspend the D and reroute C service to 205 Street as a full-time Concourse local considering the reroutes involved. As this would make for a tight squeeze in the Cranberry tubes, some F trains would run via the Crosstown line, labelled as G trains to minimize confusion.

 

G trains running on Queens Blvd would be less confusing in this scenario as service would be extended from Court Square to 71 Avenue to compensate for the loss of M service. Finally, to maintain some service along the 63rd Street line, a shuttle would run from 21 St-Queensbridge to Lexington Av-63 St to connect with the Q trains.

 

There are no winners in this proposal, but there plenty of losers. Our biggest losers would be riders along Central Park West. Under this proposal, service along that line would be cut in half. In a close second, Queens Blvd local riders, who also have their Manhattan-Queens service halved. 

 

I'd like to see how you'd reroute trains around any line closure of your choice. I realize this is more of a thought exercise than anything else, but I would greatly appreciate it if you kept the ludicrously outrageous ideas to a minimum. Also, be prepared for any criticism. I do not consider myself above the fray and neither should you. I look forward to your responses.

 

For this proposal, here's how I would do it (and it's a tough one to say the least):

 

A major balancing act would have to be what to do with 6th Avenue.  What I would do is this:

 

The (B)(D) and (F) ALL are suspended entirely for the length of this project

 

The (C) becomes a 24/7 line between Euclid Avenue and 205th Street in the Bronx as a local at all times.

 

The (E) (at a max of 18 TPH) moves back to 179 and makes the stops it used to where the (F) does now until the (E) joins the line, but otherwise runs as it does now.

 

The (G) is extended on both ends between Coney Island (via Culver) and 71st-Continental (or if necessary 179th) via QB Local and Culver Local at all times.  If necessary, additional short-turn (G) trains can run between Bedford-Nostrand and Coney Island

 

The  (brownM) returns to brown and runs from Metropolitan Avenue to Coney Island via its old route and then via Brighton Local for the first time since 1986.  This will be a 24/7 line.

 

The (N) becomes a Broadway and 4th Avenue Local during this but otherwise runs as it does now.

 

The (R) becomes a 24/7 line but otherwise runs as it does now (though if needed can be extended to 179th),

 

The (Q) becomes a 24/7 Brighton Express between 96th Street and Brighton Beach with evenings, nights and weekends the line running to Coney Island (though late nights, the (Q) and (M) could both run as locals along Brighton).

 

The (W) (at a max of 12 TPH) moves to QB 24/7 running from Jamaica Center to Coney Island via QB Express, Broadway Express, The Bridge (skipping DeKalb), 4th Avenue Express and via the West End to Coney Island.  This line also runs 24/7.

 

This is not perfect, especially since in this scenario it would require a transfer between the N/R at 9th Street and (G) at 4th Avenue for the Culver Line (or the N/R to/from the A/C at Jay-Metrotech to the (G) at Hoyt-Schermerhorn), but this might be the best way to streamline what is left for now.  You could also add an OOS transfer between the (G) at Fulton and 2/3/4/5/M/N/Q/R/W at Atlantic-Barclays to accommodate this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll take a crack at this:

(A): via Local

(B): Suspended

(C): Suspended

(D): 205th St to Coney Island via 8th Ave Exp/Culver Local

(E): Extra Service

(F): Reduced service; via Crosstown or down Broadway and West End

(G): Extra Service; extended to Kings Highway Rush Hours

(J): Extended to 9th Avenue via 4th Avenue Local rush hour

(M): via Broad St, 4th Avenue Express, and West End Local to Coney Island

(N): The select trains that start at 96th go via Brighton Express.

(W): via Whitehall St and Brighton Express to Brighton Beach

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking the same thing.

 

If it's the 8th Av Line below 59th, for example:

 

(A) via (D) to West 4th, then via (F) to MetroTech

(C) local via Fulton Street, terminating at either MetroTech or at Court Street/Transit Museum on the west and either Euclid or Rockaway/116 on the east

(B) is CPW local to 168 St; terminates at Columbus Circle but either goes to Penn to reverse or holds to let (A)(D) pass through the switches below 72nd

 

(E) follows the (M) / (V) from 5 Av and terminates at 2 Av or replaces/supplements (R) to either Canal St or Whitehall

 

(M) goes to Chambers Street; (W) extended to 86th St on the Sea Beach; (R) is truncated to Whitehall full-time and (G) becomes QBL local full-time if (E) goes to 2 Av; if not, (W) is suspended and (N) service increased with 1/4 trains to 96th St.

You can't terminate the (C) at the Transit Museum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think full closures are necessary. If union work rules are reformed, and more fastrack type things are done (overnight/weekend closures), things could get done much faster. I also think the infrastructural toll other lines would suffer as a result of a full closure on one should be considered. 

That's part of the problem, but the main issue is a simple lack of time. Weekday late nights only leave about five hours for any kind of work to be done. Same with the midday disruptions. By the time the workers set up and dismantle their necessary equipment for the morning and evening rush respectively, likely not much had been accomplished during that period. Even the FASTRACK closures only give an additional two hours of work time, which is proving to be insufficient given the ongoing weekend disruptions in the same locations. Take for instance the Crosstown FASTRACK earlier this month. Despite the claim that the program was to limit the number of weekend shutdowns, the section between Bedford-Nostrand Av and Court Sq was for the past two weekends on top of the FASTRACK shutdown.

 

It's becoming more apparent that weekends are the only times where significant repairs can be completed and I fear that the work required for many sections, that is simply not enough. Not when it comes to major work like the Herald Sqaure and West 4th interlocking projects.

 

For lines with express and local tracks (like the 4ave line), is it necessary to bring them into full closures?

You could do express/local only services where the local or express tracks are closed for upgrades 

That really doesn't work unless the local and express tracks are completely separated like the northern half of the Lexington Ave line. In most cases, trains passing by on the operable tracks would still slow down work considerably. For starters, the out of service tracks would have to be walled off to avoid unnecessary slow-speed orders in the work area. Then there's the matter of work efficiency. It would take twice as long to fix a standard four-track line under partial closures than it would under a complete one.

 

<removed for space>

That's actually not a bad idea. I'd switch the (M) and (Q) to retain the current 24/7 Broadway Express - Brighton Local service and let the (M) continue to operate as a late night shuttle, but that's just a personal preference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The museum would have to close for it to happen, but the track connections are there. It'd be like City Hall on the (6) or inner South Ferry on the (5):

 

http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/caption.pl?/img/trackmap/pm_southeast.png

That might have to happen in this case OR for the duration of such a shutdown, one track is in use as a terminal and people can enter and exit the transit museum from such trains.

 

Better solution to me is to simply have the (C) replace the (B) and (D) in The Bronx (with perhaps a rush-hour (H) or (K) added that would serve as the peak-direction express train in the Bronx, possibly also operating express in Manhattan during rush hours both ways),  While using the transit museum would allow the (F) to operate along 8th Avenue more easily (since then the (C) can be a Brooklyn-only like between the Transit Museum and Euclid), it may create more headaches than its worth, hence my suspending the (B)(D) and (F) entirely and having the (C)(G)(brownM) and (W) pick up large chunks of the slack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow; like a more serious version of the "What if" thread.

 

Columbus Circle-Jay would be too much; unless there were multiple disasters that affected that whole stretch. If they ever did do something like that, it would be in smaller sections; at the most, 59th-W4th, where you could cross over to 8th Ave.

 

If the express tracks were out, on the Brooklyn side, it would basically be the same as a "Manhattan Bridge South side open only" pattern, so you would see the  <Q> and the extended (W) again.

On the IND, you could have:

 

A 205th-Queens, express
C 207th-WTC local
E Parsons-Euclid express in Manhattan, local in Bklyn
F 179-C via 53rd St/8 Ave local to W4, then normal (would need punches at 42nd nb; 50th sb; punches already being installed at W4).
 
Still; I don't think they're going to do all of this on a 24/7 basis, barring major disasters.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When long-term closures are proposed, the first thing to look at exactly what customers are affected, and then determine alternative service for them. 

  • CPW/Concourse: Riders will almost certainly transfer at Columbus Circle to the (1), which runs about one block west on 7 Ave. Some (D) riders may use the (4) and transfer at 59 St or 53 St instead.
  • 53 St: The existing (M) service has to be modified or suspended. The (E) will need a supplemental service.
  • 63 St: The existing (F) service has to be modified or suspended. The connection to the Broadway Line could be used.
  • Williamsburg Bridge: The (M) should be taken off 6 Ave, and sent downtown.
  • Rutgers St: The (F) probably could be routed onto 8 Ave. A hypothetical transfer between Prince St and Broadway-Lafayette would be well-patronized.
  • Manhattan Bridge north side tracks: There's a huge track issue here - the express tracks can't access 8 Ave at 4 St. So unfortunately this section of the line can't be used. At best a shuttle could run between W 4 St and Grand St.

Note that closing 6 Ave results in an IND configuration similar to the 1937 system map (http://nycsubway.org.s3.amazonaws.com/images/maps/ind_1937.jpg), so start from there. Utilize Broadway and 63 St at full capacity to keep everything moving.

 

4 services on 8 Ave:

  • (A): Same as today but local between 145 St and 168 St.
  • (B): Bedford Park Blvd - WTC: Concourse local, 8 Ave local. Take the (C) late nights. 
  • (C): Norwood 205 St - Euclid Ave: Concourse Exp, 8 Ave Exp, Brooklyn local. Running the (C) express in Manhattan removes merges and potential delays at Canal St. Local late nights.
  • (F): Coney Island - Jamaica 179 St via 8 Ave / 53 St.

4 services on Broadway. Keep the express/bridge services fully separated from the local tracks to maximize capacity.

  • (N): Coney Island - Ditmars Blvd via Sea Beach and Montague St. Local entirely, with some trains short turning at Whitehall St.
  • (Q): Coney Island - Jamaica Center. Brighton local, Broadway express (63 St), QB express.
  • (R): Same as today.
  • (W): Coney Island - Forest Hills. West End, Broadway Express (63 St), QB local.

The most controversial thing here is to turn SAS into a 4 station (T) shuttle. However, given that Queens ridership is several times greater, I think 63 St service has to be increased to make up for the loss at 53 St.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think full closures are necessary. If union work rules are reformed, and more fastrack type things are done (overnight/weekend closures), things could get done much faster. I also think the infrastructural toll other lines would suffer as a result of a full closure on one should be considered. 

 

When you are replacing a concrete roadbed and replacing an entire interlocking, an overnight or weekend closure is not enough time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too many "what if's" here.  My aging brain cells can't handle it.  I agree that we need week long or multi week closures to get work done quickly under strict supervision, especially if private contractors are doing the work.  But I doubt if the rush hour riders would be too receptive.  Their attitude would be to dump the timeframe onto everybody else, yet the rush hour riders are the ones to most to benefit from upgrades.

 

Any large scale changes as suggested in the opening post has to be taken within the context of the entire B Division.  I am not about to rob Peter to pay Paul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.